State withholds funds from county

The state is withholding $1.5 million from the Clark County district attorney's office because of a conflict over how the office represents the county's Department of Family Services in child welfare cases.

The decision, reached Monday, will likely lead to a legal battle between the state and District Attorney David Roger, who said the state appropriations bill that allowed the withholding is unconstitutional.

The conflict arose from the Legislature's funding bill that passed in May. The bill included language that required the district attorney to represent only the Department of Family Services, which handles child protection, foster care and other child welfare issues in the county.

That conflicts with existing state law, which requires the district attorney to "represent the interest of the public" in child welfare proceedings.

Roger believed he complied with both requirements by dedicating three civil attorneys to represent Family Services and another group of lawyers to handle child abuse and neglect cases in Family Court.

But others thought that created a potential conflict that could force two lawyers from the district attorney's office to represent opposing interests in the courtroom.

Faced with the conflicting laws, Mike Willden, director of the Nevada Department of Health and Human Services, consulted the attorney general's office, the governor's office and state lawmakers before deciding to withhold the money, said his spokesman, Ben Kieckhefer.

"This is an issue where DHHS is stuck in the middle," he said.

The $1.5 million was earmarked for the next two fiscal years.

Kieckhefer said the intent of state lawmakers was a "strong argument" in Willden's decision.

Assemblywoman Debbie Smith, D-Sparks, defended the language in the appropriations bill, saying it clarified existing law and was in the best interest of children.

She said district attorneys and child welfare departments across the country, including Washoe County, have found ways to work together, and she hoped withholding the money would make that happen in Clark County.

"This really is about relationship building," Smith said.

But Roger vowed to continue serving the public interest and using his staffers to handle child abuse and neglect cases, even if that meant cutting positions used to represent Family Services.

"I will not turn my back on a child in danger," he said.

If the county can't replace the lost funding, six or seven people could be laid off, he said.

Roger said late Monday that the state had not informed him of its decision, and once he receives a formal letter, he will research his options, including legal action.

"In all likelihood, we will be filing a civil lawsuit," Roger said.

The lawsuit could include a breach of contract claim, as the county handles child welfare cases under contract from the state.

The current contract ends Sept. 30, and the county could decide not to renew it unless the state replaces the funding, Roger said.

"We will continue to protect children no matter if (the Department of Family Services) has a mathematical formula that says children are not in danger," Roger said.

Contact reporter Brian Haynes at bhaynes@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0281.